Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

bmj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 215 posts

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#201

Post by Evgeny »

paul_f wrote: post #193
analog wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a recent study which found that running only increased life expectancy if you were running 10-20miles (or km, memory hazy) per week. More than that and life expectancy decreased again. So endurance running, which I would guess you would categorise as marathon+ will decrease your life expectancy. Edit: /s/will/could Depending on how much running you already do.

Running 4 hours per week for 20 years will add 6 months to your expected lifespan. However, those 6 months will have been entirely spent running. So, plan accordingly.

You shouldn't forget to compare general health of one who runs versus one who doesn't. Not only just wellbeing, but sick days (missed on income), medical bills etc.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#202

Post by jacques_chester »

sareon wrote: post #200
jacques_chester wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it goes away when pressure is applied, it might be trigger points. Find a physio who does dry needle therapy and see if that helps.

I hurt my back rowing in 2009 in the L5-S1 area. Many physios diagnosed it as different things and many of them tried different treatments. None of them worked and it hurt for three years. I tried lots of different core exercises, some physios tried manual and manipulative therapy (which helped for a bit) but after a few months of sessions of dry needling my back hasn't bothered me with that injury in over a year. I…

I feel like I should say something in-jokey here.

I'm pretty keen on dry needling of trigger points, given how many things it's fixing for me. But I'm wary of seeming like a new convert -- I think people should consider it as one possible cause of pain, often undiagnosed because it's not a commonly taught concept.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#203

Post by analog »

LeeHunter wrote: post #177
MaybiusStrip wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good book for beginners but Mark has no shortage of critics and enemies in the strength community.

I'm not sure why you're being voted down. I've also seen some criticism, especially with respect to older (+40) people causing serious injury to their vertebra with the loads from correctly performed lifting. Lifting weights is not for every body, no matter how well you follow directions.

Have you got links to those? I'd be interested to see them since I'm in that group. For me personally weight lifting seems to have prevented a lot of injuries that I used to get.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#204

Post by monkeyspaw »

drexel wrote: post #47
unoti wrote: post #4

I've been doing strength training (the program is called Stronglifts 5x5[1]) with freeweights for about 9 months now. I just turned 44, and I've never felt better, and I'm stronger now than I have ever been. The program I use describes 3 simple exercises to do 3 times a week, and each workout takes me 30-45 minutes. Very little equipment is needed. It's hard to find good information about this on the net that covers…

The book "Starting Strength" by Mark Rippetoe (book and author pretty much universally lauded by the strength training community) is also a great starting point. Beginners can often become overwhelmed by all the differing viewpoints and training methods presented to them when researching strength training but (besides avoiding injury by maintaining proper form and generally listening to your body to allow sufficient…

Just started this program about a month ago. I'm stronger, fitter, and healthier than I've ever been.

It really simplifies things in the weight room, points you in the right direction, and says "now go do this."

It's pretty much gimmick free, and very straightforward. Highly recommend it.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#205

Post by stouset »

amirmc wrote: post #178
JPKab wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get what is called a "squat cage" (you can build one yourself if you don't like the options to purchase.) along with an Olympic bar (it is a bar weighted to 45 lbs. along with Olympic weights. You can do squats safely without a spotter by using a squat cage. Also, when you place a bench inside of the cage, you can use catch bars to safely bench press without a spotter (the safety bars will catch the bar at chest leve…

> "You can do squats safely without a spotter..." Just to add that 'safely' in this context means that if you fail at a rep, the cage will catch the bar. Obviously it can't do anything to point out bad form as a spotter, or even a mirror, could. I use the squat cage at the gym I go to and I wish they had more mirrors. A pair of angled ones so I can see a side-on view would be really helpful.

Don't use mirrors too much. In fact, you should do most of your exercises facing away from any mirrors.

A mirror only shows the front of you. If you stop looking into a mirror, you'll find that your ability to "feel" your form through proprioception becomes significantly stronger. And it will tell you things that you simply cannot view in a mirror. Try doing an entire session without using mirrors; if you find it difficult or impossible to maintain proper form, that should be an extremely compelling sign that the mirror has become a crutch, and not a very good one.

There's also the unfortunate fact that, by looking into a mirror, you're guaranteeing that your head is tilted farther back than it ought to be for exercises like squats. You never want to have your neck extended while carrying a significant load. It should be in a neutral position — for a squat position, this will equate to looking at the floor roughly five or six feet in front of you.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#206

Post by raverbashing »

analog wrote: post #187
rdouble wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The body type of world class 100m competitors is due to genetics and steroids. Sprint workouts don't make people muscular. Muscular guys gravitate towards those events. Also, HIIT workouts are nothing like what 100m runners do to train.

You can be pretty sure that marathon runners are using PEDs too.

PED drugs yes, anabolic steroids no

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#207

Post by analog »

raverbashing wrote: post #206
analog wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can be pretty sure that marathon runners are using PEDs too.

PED drugs yes, anabolic steroids no

The primary effect of anabolic steroids is to reduce recovery times. Bodybuilders get so big on them not because they magically make you bigger but because they let you train incredibly hard.

Long distance runners do use anabolic steroids amongst other PEDs. [1]

"For example, Lyubov Denisova tested positive for Prostanozol and Testosterone in 2007. She has won the Honolulu and Los Angeles marathons and has been 2nd place at New York."

Prostanozol is an anabolic steroid.

[1] http://www.runningahead.com/forums/post/d63143aa7f5246359388...

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#208

Post by lukevdp »

paul_f wrote: post #194
micro_cam wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are all things that have been shown to extend lifespan in various studies in the past few years. Some of these studies were observational like this, some where done by giving mice ridiculous doses etc but they all got picked up by the media. Some of these results are probably valid but if you want to scientifically extend your life you need to do so with statistical rigor.

Stop smoking, buckle your seatbelt, lose a few pounds and take tons of Vitamin D. Everything else is conjecture.

Except don't take tons of Vitamin D http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529102346.ht...

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#209

Post by Shorel »

kyllo wrote: post #27
reasonattlm wrote: post #15

Hand grip strength. Pretty much all other measures of frailty - such as muscle mass. Time spent jogging. Time spent not sitting. Time spent being active. All of these correlate well with mortality. Causation is harder to prove on these longer timescales. e.g. more likely to be strong and exercising because you are more robust, or more likely to be more robust because you are strong and exercising. Or if both, as is l…

I think the calorie restriction studies deserve scrutiny. Do people who practice calorie restriction live longer compared to otherwise fit, healthy people who do not practice it? Or do they just live longer compared to the average (which includes a significant component of obese and/or diabetic over-eaters)?

Don't forget carbohydrates restriction. Calories are not all the same.

Re: Association between muscular strength and mortality in men (2008) [pdf]

#210

Post by raverbashing »

analog wrote: post #207
raverbashing wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PED drugs yes, anabolic steroids no

The primary effect of anabolic steroids is to reduce recovery times. Bodybuilders get so big on them not because they magically make you bigger but because they let you train incredibly hard. Long distance runners do use anabolic steroids amongst other PEDs. [1] "For example, Lyubov Denisova tested positive for Prostanozol and Testosterone in 2007. She has won the Honolulu and Los Angeles marathons and has been 2nd p…

I am aware of the effects of AEs

In fact, the regimen of muscle fatigue/recovery is different between endurance sports and 'strength' sports

A marathonist is not limited by his/her muscle mass. A strength athlete is.

Yes, some marathonists may use AEs, but it's much rarer than other PED (like EPO, HGH - which also helps with recovery, blood doping, etc)

Prostanozol is actually a "prodrug" (yes, it is an AE). "Prodrug" usually means more liver damage and less results than a proper AE cycle (as it's called) and there are better alternatives.

Post reply on HN